High Performance Golf Ball Having a Reduced-Distance

ABSTRACT

A high performance golf ball having a reduced overall distance while maintaining the appearance of a high performance trajectory. The golf ball includes a combination of low CoR core and cover materials coupled with a less efficient aerodynamic dimple pattern that achieves a reduction in carry and overall distance of at least 5 yards versus a conventional golf ball, while still providing the look, sound, feel and apparent flight of a conventional golf ball. A high performance golf ball having a reduced distance is also achieved by maintaining the lift to weight ratio to be greater than 1.5 at a Reynolds number of about 205,000 and a spin rate of 2900 rpm.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation-in-part of application Ser. No. 11/214,428, filed on Aug. 29, 2005, which is a continuation-in-part of application Ser. No. 11/108,812, filed Apr. 19, 2005, which is a continuation of application Ser. No. 10/784,744, filed Feb. 24, 2004, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,913,550, which is a continuation of application Ser. No. 10/096,852, filed Mar. 14, 2002, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,729,976 and also a continuation-in-part of application Ser. No. 10/964,449, filed Oct. 13, 2004, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,033,297, which is a continuation of application Ser. No. 10/337,275, filed Jan. 6, 2003. The disclosures of the related applications and patents are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to golf balls, and more particularly, to a golf ball having a reduced distance while maintaining the appearance of a normal high performance trajectory.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Solid golf balls typically include single-layer, dual-layer (i.e., solid core and a cover), and multi-layer (i.e., solid core of one or more layers and/or a cover of one or more layers) golf balls. Solid balls have traditionally been considered longer and more durable than predecessor wound balls. Dual-layer golf balls are typically made with a single solid core encased by a cover. These balls are generally most popular among recreational golfers, because they are durable and provide maximum distance. Typically, the solid core is made of polybutadiene cross-linked with zinc diacrylate and/or similar crosslinking agents. The cover material is a tough, cut-proof blend of one or more materials known as ionomers, such as SURLYN®, sold commercially by DuPont or IOTEK®, sold commercially by Exxon.

Multi-layer golf balls may have multiple core layers, multiple intermediate layers, and/or multiple cover layers. They tend to overcome some of the undesirable features of conventional two-layer balls, such as hard feel and less control, while maintaining the positive attributes, such as increased initial velocity and distance. Further, it is desirable that multi-layer balls have a “click and feel” similar to wound balls.

Additionally, the spin rates of golf balls affect the overall control of the balls in accordance to the skill level of the players. Low spin rates provide improved distance, but make golf balls difficult to stop on shorter shots, such as approach shots to greens. High spin rates allow more skilled players to maximize control of the golf ball, but adversely affect driving distance. To strike a balance between the spin rates and the playing characteristics of golf balls, additional layers, such as intermediate layers, outer core layers and inner cover layers are added to the solid core golf balls to improve the playing characteristics of the ball.

By altering ball construction and composition, manufacturers can vary a wide range of playing characteristics, such as resilience, durability, spin, and “feel,” each of which can be optimized for various playing abilities. One golf ball component, in particular, that many manufacturers are continually looking to improve is the center or core. The core is the “engine” that influences the golf ball to go longer when hit by a club head. Generally, golf ball cores and/or centers are constructed with a polybutadiene-based polymer composition. Compositions of this type are constantly being altered in an effort to provide a targeted or desired coefficient of restitution (“CoR”), while at the same time resulting in a lower compression which, in turn, can lower the golf ball spin rate and/or provide better “feel.”

The dimples on a golf ball are used to adjust the aerodynamic characteristics of a golf ball and, therefore, the majority of golf ball manufacturers research dimple patterns, shape, volume, and cross-section in order to improve overall flight distance of a golf ball. Determining specific dimple arrangements and dimple shapes that result in an aerodynamic advantage involves the direct measurement of aerodynamic characteristics. These aerodynamic characteristics define the forces acting upon the golf ball throughout flight.

Aerodynamic forces acting on a golf ball are typically resolved into orthogonal components of lift and drag. Lift is defined as the aerodynamic force component acting perpendicular to the flight path. It results from a difference in pressure that is created by a distortion in the air flow that results from the back spin of the ball. A boundary layer forms at the stagnation point of the ball, B, then grows and separates at points S1 and S2, as shown in FIG. 1. Due to the ball backspin, the top of the ball moves in the direction of the airflow, which retards the separation of the boundary layer. In contrast, the bottom of the ball moves against the direction of airflow, thus advancing the separation of the boundary layer at the bottom of the ball. Therefore, the position of separation of the boundary layer at the top of the ball, S1, is further back than the position of separation of the boundary layer at the bottom of the ball, S2. This asymmetrical separation creates an arch in the flow pattern, requiring the air over the top of the ball to move faster and, thus, have lower pressure than the air underneath the ball.

Drag is defined as the aerodynamic force component acting parallel to the ball's flight direction. As the ball travels through the air, the air surrounding the ball has different velocities and, accordingly, different pressures. The air exerts maximum pressure at the stagnation point, B, on the front of the ball, as shown in FIG. 1. The air then flows over the sides of the ball and has increased velocity and reduced pressure. The air separates from the surface of the ball at points S1 and S2, leaving a large turbulent flow area with low pressure, i.e., the wake. The difference between the high pressure in front of the ball and the low pressure behind the ball reduces the ball speed and acts as the primary source of drag for a golf ball.

Advances in golf ball compositions and dimple designs have caused some high performance golf balls to exceed the maximum distance allowed by the United States Golf Association (USGA), when hit by a professional golfer. The maximum distance allowed by the USGA is 317 yards ±3 yards, when impacted by a standard driver at 176 feet per second and at a calibrated swing condition of 10°, 2520 RPM, and 175 MPH with a calibrated ball. According to the USGA, there are at least five factors that contribute to this increase in distance, including: clubhead composition and design, increased athleticism of elite players, balls with low spin rates and enhanced aerodynamics, optimization in matching balls, shafts, and cubheads to a golfer's individual swing characteristics, and improved golf course agronomy. Even though numerous factors influence the increase in distance, golf traditionalists have been demanding that the USGA roll back the distance standard for golf balls to preserve the game. The USGA has recently instituted a research project to design and make a prototype golf ball that would reduce the maximum ball distance by 15 or 25 yards. (See “USGA letter to manufactures takes ball debate to new level,” by D. Seanor, Golfweek, pp. 4, 26, Apr. 23, 2005).

The patent literature contains a number of references that discuss reduction of the distance that golf balls fly. As disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,209,485 to Nesbitt, a reduction in the distance that a range ball will travel may be obtained by a combination of inefficient dimple patterns on the ball cover and low resilient polymeric compositions for the ball core. Low resilient compositions are disclosed to include a blend of a commonly used diene rubber, such as high cis-polybutadiene, and a low resilient halogenated butyl rubber. Inefficient dimple patterns are disclosed to include an octahedral pattern with a dimple free equator and a dimple coverage of less than 50%. As disclosed in the '485 patent, the resulting range ball travels about 50 yards less than comparative balls and has a lower coefficient of restitution than the coefficient of restitution of comparative balls. The '485 patent theorizes that about 40% of the reduction in distance is attributable to the inefficient design, and about 60% is attributable to the low resilient ball composition. Range balls, however, do not have the desirable feel or trajectory of high performance balls. Further, the art does not suggest a way to fine-tune the distance of high performance golf balls to adhere to a shorter USGA maximum distance, while maintaining the appearance of a high performance trajectory.

As such, there remains a need in the art to achieve a golf ball that flies shorter than the current performance balls and maintains the appearance of a high performance trajectory without adversely affecting the ball's other desired qualities, such as durability, spin, and “feel.”

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed to a high performance golf ball having a reduced overall distance while maintaining the appearance of a high performance trajectory.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

These and other aspects of the present invention may be more fully understood with reference to, but not limited by, the following drawings.

FIG. 1 is an illustration of the air flow on a golf ball in flight.

FIG. 2 is an illustration of the forces acting on a golf ball in flight.

FIGS. 3-5 illustrate trajectory plots of inventive and comparative balls, according to one embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 6 is a diagram showing how a dimple's edge angle and diameter are measured.

FIG. 7 is a top or polar view of an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 7A is a side or equatorial view of an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 8 is a top or polar view of another embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 8A is a side or equatorial view of another embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 9 illustrates trajectory plots of inventive and comparative balls, according to another embodiment of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The distance that a golf ball will travel upon impact by a golf club is a function of the coefficient of restitution (CoR), the weight, and the aerodynamic characteristics of the ball, which among other things are affected by one or more factors, such as the size, dimple coverage, dimple size and dimple shape. An embodiment of the present invention provides for a golf ball having a combination of low CoR core and cover materials coupled with a less efficient aerodynamic dimple pattern that achieves a reduction in carry and overall distance of at least 5 yards versus a conventional golf ball, while still providing the look, sound, feel and trajectory shape of a conventional golf ball. In various embodiments of the present invention, a high performance golf ball having a reduced distance is achieved via a combination of increased coefficient of drag, increased coefficient of lift, reduced weight, increased size, reduced compression, and/or decreased CoR. Specific embodiments of the present invention have targeted spin rates, compressions, and coefficients of lift and drag. Additionally, embodiments of golf balls according to the present invention have greater distance reduction at high ball speeds, i.e., at high swing speeds, than at lower swing speeds.

Coefficient of Restitution

The CoR is defined as the ratio of the relative velocity of two colliding objects after the collision to the relative velocity of the two colliding objects prior to the collision. For golf balls, the CoR is measured by propelling it into a very massive steel block. This simplifies the measurement, because the velocity of the block is zero before the collision and essentially zero after the collision. Thus, the CoR becomes the ratio of the velocity of the golf ball after impact to the velocity of the golf ball prior to impact, and it varies from 0 to 1.0. A CoR value of 1.0 is equivalent to a perfectly elastic collision, and a CoR value of 0.0 is equivalent to a perfectly inelastic collision. The CoR is related to the initial velocity of the ball that must not exceed 250 ft/s (plus a 5 ft/s tolerance), the maximum limit set forth by the USGA. Hence, the CoR of golf balls are maximized and controlled, so that the initial velocity of the ball does not exceed the USGA limit. The CoR of the golf ball is affected by a number of factors including the composition of the core and the composition of the cover.

In one embodiment, a golf ball prepared according to the present invention has a “low” CoR of typically less than about 0.790, preferably about 0.500 to about 0.790, more preferably about 0.550 to about 0.785, and most preferably about 0.600 to about 0.780.

Compression

Compression is an important factor in golf ball design, e.g. the compression of the core influences the ball's spin rate off the driver and the feel of the ball. Compression is measured by applying a spring-loaded force to the golf ball center, golf ball core or the golf ball to be examined, with a manual instrument (an “Atti gauge”) manufactured by the Atti Engineering Company of Union City, N.J. This machine, equipped with a Federal Dial Gauge, Model D8 1-C, employs a calibrated spring under a known load. Using the Atti Compression tester, a total of 0.2 inches of deflection is applied to both the spring within the Federal gauge and the ball. The amount of deflection of the ball relative to the spring in the gauge determines the ball's compression reading. If the gauge spring is deflected 0.1″ and the ball is deflected 0.1″, then the ball reads as a “100 compression”. If the ball is deflected 0.11″ and the gauge is deflected 0.90″, the ball is a 90 compression (the reading on the dial gauge of the spring deflects less, as the ball is softer and deflects more, as the ball is harder). Thus more compressible, softer materials will have lower Atti gauge values than harder, less compressible materials. Compression measured with this instrument has also been referred to as PGA compression in the past. The approximate relationship that exists between Atti or PGA compression and Riehle compression can be expressed as: (Atti or PGA compression)=(160-Riehle Compression).

The Atti compression of golf balls prepared according to the invention is typically less than 100 as measured on a sphere, preferably between about 80 to about 99, more preferably between about 86 to about 94. In one embodiment, golf balls prepared according to the present invention have an inner core with an Atti compression of about 45.

Aerodynamic Characteristics

The aerodynamic forces acting on a golf ball in flight are enumerated in Equation 1 and illustrated in FIG. 2: F=F _(L) +F _(D) +F _(G)  (Eq. 1) Where F=total force acting on the ball

-   -   F_(L)=lift force     -   F_(D)=drag force     -   F_(G)=gravity force

The lift force (F_(L)) is the component of the aerodynamic force acting in a direction dictated by the cross product of the spin vector and the velocity vector. The drag force (F_(D)) is the component of the aerodynamic force acting in a direction that is directly opposite the velocity vector. The lift and drag forces of Equation 1 are calculated in Equations 2 and 3, respectively: F_(L)=0.5C_(L)ρAV²  (Eq. 2) F_(D)=0.5C_(D)ρPAV²  (Eq. 3) where ρ=density of air (slugs/ft³)

-   -   A=projected area of the ball (ft²) ((π/4)D²)     -   D=ball diameter (ft)     -   V=ball velocity (ft/s)     -   C_(L)=dimensionless lift coefficient     -   C_(D)=dimensionless drag coefficient

Lift and drag coefficients are used to quantify the force imparted to a ball in flight and are dependent on air density, air viscosity, ball speed, and spin rate; the influence of all these parameters may be captured by two dimensionless parameters Spin Ratio (SR) and Reynolds Number (N_(Re)). Spin Ratio is the rotational surface speed of the ball divided by ball velocity. Reynolds Number quantifies the ratio of inertial to viscous forces acting on the golf ball moving through air. SR and N_(Re) are calculated in Equations 4 and 5 below: SR=ω(D/2)/V  (Eq. 4) N _(Re) =DVρ/μ  (Eq. 5) where ω=ball rotation rate (radians/s) (2π(RPS))

-   -   RPS=ball rotation rate (revolution/s)     -   V=ball velocity (ft/s)     -   D=ball diameter (ft)     -   ρ=air density (slugs/ft³)     -   μ=absolute viscosity of air (lb/ft²-s)

There are a number of suitable methods for determining the lift and drag coefficients for a given range of spin rate and Reynolds number, which include the use of indoor test ranges with ballistic screen technology. U.S. Pat. No 5,682,230, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated by reference herein, teaches the use of a series of ballistic screens to acquire lift and drag coefficients. U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,186,002 and 6,285,445, also incorporated in their entirety by reference herein, disclose methods for determining lift and drag coefficients for a given range of velocities and spin rates using an indoor test range, wherein the values for C_(L) and C_(D) are related to spin rates and Reynolds numbers for each shot. One skilled in the art of golf ball aerodynamics testing could readily determine the lift and drag coefficients through the use of an indoor test range.

Reduced distance golf balls prepared according to the present invention preferably have a relatively high coefficient of drag (C_(D)). In one embodiment, the C_(D) is greater than 0.26 at a Reynolds number of 150000 and a spin rate of 3000 RPM, and greater than 0.29 at a Reynolds number of 120000 and a spin rate of 3000 RPM. Further, golf balls prepared according to the present invention may have a relatively high coefficient of lift (CL). In one embodiment, the C_(L) is greater than 0.21 at a Reynolds number of 150000 and a spin rate of 3000 RPM, and greater than 0.23 at a Reynolds number of 120000 and a spin rate of 3000 RPM.

In one embodiment, the present invention is directed to a golf ball having reduced flight distance while retaining the appearance of a normal trajectory that can be defined by two non-dimensional parameters that account for the lift, drag, size and weight of the ball. The coefficients are defined in Equations 6 and 7 below: C _(D/) W=F _(D) /W  (Eq. 6) C _(L/) W=F _(L) /W  (Eq. 7)

A reduction in flight distance is attainable when a golf ball's size, weight, dimple pattern and dimple profiles are selected to satisfy specific C_(D/W) and C_(L/W) criteria at specified combinations of Reynolds number and spin ratios (or spin rate), and the only other remaining variable is the CoR. The size of the golf ball affects the lift and drag of the ball, since these forces are directly proportional to the surface area of the ball. The weight of the ball makes up the denominator of coefficients C_(D/W) and C_(L/W). Dimple patterns, e.g., percentage of dimple coverage and geodesic patterns, can increase or decrease aerodynamic efficiency. Dimple profiles, e.g., edge angle, entry angle and shape (circular, polygonal, catenary, and constant depth), can increase or decrease the lift and/or drag experienced by the ball. According to the present invention, these factors can be selected or combined to yield desired C_(D/W) and/or C_(L/W) for a reduced distance golf ball that retains the appearance of a high performance trajectory.

In Table 1A are the C_(D/W) and/or C_(L/W) for a long distance golf ball with a high performance trajectory that were derived from information in Table 1 of parent U.S. Pat. No. 6,729,976. Accordingly, a golf ball designed to have a C_(D/W) and/or C_(L/W) within the ranges of Table 1A at specified combinations of Reynolds number and spin ratios would characteristically exhibit a high performance trajectory with improved, i.e., longer flight distance. TABLE 1A AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH PERFORMACE BALL Ball Diameter = 1.68 inches, Ball Weight between 1.55-1.62 ounces C_(L/W) = F_(L)/W C_(D/W) = F_(D)/W N_(RE) SR Low High Low High 230000 0.085 1.47 1.86 2.46 2.78 207000 0.095 1.35 1.69 2.00 2.26 184000 0.106 1.14 1.39 1.63 1.76 161000 0.122 0.95 1.17 1.26 1.34 138000 0.142 0.77 0.94 0.98 1.04 115000 0.170 0.61 0.74 0.73 0.80 92000 0.213 0.45 0.54 0.52 0.56 69000 0.284 0.27 0.34 0.33 0.37

In Table 1B are C_(D/W) and/or C_(L/W) for a reduced distance golf ball with a high performance trajectory that were derived by multiplying the coefficients of Table 1A by a distance reduction factor so that balls made to have the coefficients of Table 1B fly shorter while maintaining a similar-appearing trajectory to those of Table 1A. Suitable ranges for a distance reduction factor to achieve a golf ball in accordance with the present invention are 1.2 to 1.8, more preferably 1.4 to 1.6 and most preferably 1.5. Accordingly, one or both of the coefficients of Table 1B are then paired with CoR of the core or the ball to yield a ball that flies 15-25 yards less than the USGA maximum. In one example, once C_(D/W) and/or C_(L/W) are set, the ball designer can vary CoR to reach the distance objective, or vice versa. Table 1B lists suitable ranges of C_(D/W) and C_(L/W) at representative Reynolds number and spin ratios in accordance with the present invention. TABLE 1B AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH PERFORMACE BALL HAVING A REDUCED DISTANCE Ball Diameter = 1.68 inches, Ball Weight between 1.55-1.62 ounces C_(L/W) = F_(L)/W C_(D/W) = F_(D)/W N_(RE) SR Low Median High Low Median High 230000 0.085 1.78 2.505 3.35 2.95 3.93 5.00 207000 0.095 1.62 2.285 3.04 2.40 3.195 4.07 184000 0.106 1.43 1.90 2.50 1.96 2.54 3.17 161000 0.122 1.14 1.35 2.11 1.51 1.950 2.41 138000 0.142 0.92 1.285 1.69 1.18 1.515 1.87 115000 0.170 0.73 1.012 1.33 0.88 1.147 1.44 92000 0.213 0.54 0.742 0.97 0.62 0.81 1.01 69000 0.284 0.32 0.458 0.61 0.40 0.525 0.66

Similarly in Table 1C, a distance reduction factor was applied to C_(D/W) and C_(L/W) calculated for coefficients of lift and drag at specified Reynolds number and spin ratio as disclosed in parent application Ser. No. 10/337,275 to arrive at suitable ranges of C_(D/W) and C_(L/W) at specified Reynolds number and spin ratios in accordance with the present invention. TABLE 1C AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH PERFORMACE BALL HAVING A REDUCED DISTANCE Ball Diameter = 1.68 inches, Ball Weight 1.62 ounces C_(L/W) = F_(L)/W C_(D/W) = F_(D)/W N_(RE) SR Low Median High Low Median High 180000 0.110 1.38 1.845 2.36 0.36 0.465 0.58 70000 0.188 0.28 0.375 0.49 2.40 3.195 4.07

In accordance to the present invention, a golf ball designer first chooses the range of C_(D/W) and/or C_(L/W) corresponding to the desired reduction in total distance after impact. Next, a dimple pattern is selected. The ball then can be fine tuned with varying dimple coverage and/or dimple edge angle. Alternatively, the dimple coverage (or dimple edge angle) can be selected prior to fine tuning the dimple edge angle and/or dimple pattern.

Ball Construction

According to the Rules of Golf as approved by the USGA, a golf ball may not have a weight in excess of 1.620 ounces avoirdupois (45.93 gm.) or a diameter of less than 1.680 inches (42.67 mm.). Accordingly, a golf ball having a weight of 45.93 grams and/or a diameter of 42.67 mm inches is within the purview of this invention. However, the USGA rules do not set a minimum weight or a maximum diameter for the ball. These specifications, along with other USGA golf ball requirements, are intended to limit how far a golf ball will travel when hit. When all other parameters are maintained, an increase in the weight of the ball tends to increase the distance it will travel and lower the trajectory, as a ball having greater momentum is better able to overcome drag and a reduction in the diameter of the ball will also have the effect of increasing the distance it will travel as a smaller ball has a smaller projected area and correspondingly less drag.

In accordance with the present invention, a golf ball having a decreased weight and/or an increased diameter may be made to decrease the overall distance a ball travels at a given swing speed while maintaining a high performance trajectory during flight. Accordingly, the diameter of “oversized” golf balls prepared according to the present invention is preferably about 1.688 to about 1.800 inches, more preferably about 1.690 to about 1.740 inches and most preferably about 1.695 to about 1.725 inches. The weight of “low-weight” golf balls prepared according to the present invention is preferably about 1.39 to about 1.61 ounces, and more preferably about 1.45 to about 1.58 ounces.

Various embodiments of the present invention may be practiced using a suitable ball construction as would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. For example, the ball may have a one-piece design, a two-piece design, a three-piece design, a double core, a double cover, or multi-core and multi-cover construction depending on the type of performance desired of the ball. Further, the core may be solid, liquid filled, hollow, and/or non-spherical. It may also be wound or foamed, or it may contain fillers. Foamed cores are generally known to have lower CoR. The cover may also be a single layer cover or a multi-layer cover. The cover may be thin or thick. The cover may have a high hardness or low hardness to control the spin and feel of the ball. The cover may comprise a thermoplastic or a thermoset material, or both. In one preferred embodiment, the golf ball has a relatively thick cover, e.g., up to about 0.100 inch, made from a thermoplastic ionomer or other low resilient polymers. A ball with a thick low-resilient cover would have a lower CoR than a similar ball with a thin low-resilient cover.

Non-limiting examples of the aforementioned ball constructions, compositions and dimensions of the cover and core that may be used with the present invention include those described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,419,535, 6,152,834, 6,149,535, 5,981,654, 5,981,658, 5,965,669, 5,919,100, 5,885,172, 5,813,923, 5,803,831, 5,783,293, 5,713,801, 5,692,974, and 5,688,191, as well as in U.S. Publ. Appl. No. US 2001/0009310 A1 and WIPO Publ. Appl. No. WO 00/23519. The entire disclosures of these patents and published applications are incorporated by reference herein. The construction, materials and dimensions of the core and cover contribute to achieving the requisite CoR of a golf ball according to the present invention.

Golf ball cores of the present invention may include one or more components or layers wherein one or more of said layers comprise a blend of polymers having varying resilience. Preferably from about 5 to 95 parts of a high resilience polymer such as a high cis 1,4-polybutadiene is blended with from about 95 to 5 parts of a lower resilience polymer such as butyl rubber, low cis 1,4-polybutadiene, high vinyl polybutadiene, trans polybutadiene, or a mixture thereof More preferably the core or core layer comprises from about 10 to 90 parts of a high resilience rubber (HRP) blended with about 90 to 10 parts of of a lower resilience polymer (LRP) and most preferably the ratio is about 15 to 85 parts HRP to about 85 to 15 parts LRP.

Suitable polymers for manufacturing the core of a golf ball according to the present invention include a low resilient elastomer, such as butyl rubber. Butyl rubber has the ability to dissipate the impact energy from golf clubs to attenuate the rebound energy available for ball propulsion. Resiliency of rubber is a physical property of rubber that returns it to its original shape after deformation, without exceeding its elastic limit. For instance, the resilience of butyl rubber as measured on a Bashore resiliometer is in the range of 18% to 25%, as compared to cis-polybutadiene rubber, which is in the range of 85%-90% when they are cross-linked using appropriate cross-linking agents. Butyl rubber (IIR) is an elastomeric copolymer of isobutylene and isoprene. Detailed discussions of butyl rubber are provided in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,642,728, 2,356,128 and 3,099,644, the entire disclosures of which are incorporated by reference herein. Butyl rubber is an amorphous, non-polar polymer with good oxidative and thermal stability, good permanent flexibility and high moisture and gas resistance. Generally, butyl rubber includes copolymers of about 70% to 99.5% by weight of an isoolefin, which has about 4 to 7 carbon atoms, e.g., isobutylene, and about 0.5% to 30% by weight of a conjugated multiolefin, which has about 4 to 14 carbon atoms, e.g., isoprene. The resulting copolymer contains about 85% to about 99.8% by weight of combined isoolefin and 0.2% to 15% of combined multiolefin. Commercially available butyl rubbers include Bayer Butyl 100, 101-3, 301 and 402 manufactured by Bayer AG.

Butyl rubber is also available in halogenated form. A halogenated butyl rubber may be prepared by halogenating butyl rubber in a solution containing inert C3-C5 hydrocarbon solvent, such as pentane, hexane or heptane, and contacting this solution with a halogen gas for a predetermined amount of time, whereby halogenated butyl rubber and a hydrogen halide are formed. The halogenated butyl rubber copolymer may contain up to one halogen atom per double bond. Halogenated butyl rubbers or halobutyl rubbers include bromobutyl rubber, which may contain up to 3% reactive bromine, and chlorobutyl rubber, which may contain up to 3% reactive chlorine. Commercially available bromobutyl rubbers include Bayer Bromobutyl 2030, 2040, and X2 manufactured by Bayer AG, while chlorobutyl rubbers include Bayer 1240 and 1255. Halogenated butyl rubbers are also available from ExxorMobil Chemical,

Butyl rubber is also available in sulfonated form, such as those disclosed in the '728 patent and in U.S. Pat. No. 4,229,337. Generally, butyl rubber having a viscosity average molecular weight in the range of about 5,000 to 85,000 and a mole percent unsaturation of about 3% to about 4% may be sulfonated with a sulfonating agent comprising a sulfur trioxide (SO₃) donor in combination with a Lewis base containing oxygen, nitrogen or phosphorus. The Lewis base serves as a complexing agent for the SO₃ donor. The SO₃ donor includes a compound containing available SO₃, such as chlorosulfonic acid, fluorosulfonic acid, sulfuric acid and oleum.

Other suitable polymers include the elastomers that combine butyl rubbers with the environmental and aging resistance of ethylene propylene diene monomer rubbers (EPDM), commercially available as Exxpro™ from ExxonMobil Chemical. More specifically, these elastomers are brominated polymers derived from a copolymer of isobutylene (IB) and p-methylstyrene (PMS). Bromination selectively occurs on the PMS methyl group to provide a reactive benzylic bromine functionality. Another suitable velocity-reduced polymer is copolymer of isobulyline and isoprene with a styrene block copolymer branching agent to improve manufacturing processability.

Another suitable low resilient polymer is polyisobutylene. Polyisobutylene is a homopolymer, which is produced by cationic polymerization methods. Commercially available grades of polyisobutylene, under the tradename Vistanex™ also from ExxonMobil Chemical, are highly paraffinic hydrocarbon polymers composed on long straight chain molecules containing only chain-end olefinic bonds. An advantage of such elastomer is the combination of low rebound energy and chemical inertness to resist chemical or oxidative attacks. Polyisobutylene is available as a viscous liquid or semi-solids, and can be dissolved in certain hydrocarbon solvents.

Additional polymers useful in the present invention for reducing the resilience of high cis-1,4-polybutadiene include low cis-1,4polybutadiene such as Taktene 4510 manufactured by the Lanxess Corporation, or Afdene BR 45 manufactured by the Karbochem Ltd. Also useful are relatively high trans-content polybutadienes, polyisoprenes, high vinyl content polybutadienes such as Ricon high vinyl 150, 152, 153, 154, 156, and 157 sold by the Sartomer Co.

Butyl rubbers can be cured by a number of curing agents, preferably a peroxide curing agent. Other suitable curing agents may include antimony oxide, lead oxide or lead peroxide. Lead based curing agents may be used when appropriate safety precautions are implemented. Butyl rubbers are commercially available in various grades from viscous liquid to solids with varying the degree of unsaturation and molecular weights.

In an embodiment, a golf ball core prepared in accordance with the present invention includes 15-50 parts butyl rubber to 50-85 parts polybutadiene to make up 100 parts of rubber (phr), cross-linking agents and other additives, such that it has a low CoR of between about 0.550 and about 0.650. The polybutadiene preferably has a high cis 1,4 content of above about 85% and more preferably above about 95%. Commercial sources for polybutadiene include Shell 1220 manufactured by Shell Chemical and CB-23 manufactured by Bayer AG. In a further embodiment, a golf ball core prepared in accordance with the present invention includes 25 parts butyl rubber to 75 parts polybutadiene to achieve a CoR of about 0.650 to about 0.750.

Tables 2- 5 show characteristics of various embodiments of relatively lower CoR cores made from compositions of butyl rubber or halogenated butyl rubbers mixed with polybutadiene rubber (Shell 1220) in accordance with the present invention. ZDA is utilized as a co-reaction agent, with the addition of di-tert-butyl peroxide (DTBP) or dicumnyl peroxide. A core comprised of Shell 1220 polybutadiene is used as a control. TABLE 2 REDUCED-DISTANCE GOLF BALLS WITH LOW COR CORE Core Compositions (27 pph ZDA - Comp. Trigonox 65) Size (in) Weight (g) (Atti) CoR S.G. 75 PBD/ 1.539 37.63 110 0.720 1.140 25 Butyl rubber (Butyl 301) 75 PBD/ 1.543 37.09 98 0.717 1.140 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Bromo 2030) 75 PBD/ 1.541 37.12 109 0.724 1.140 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Bromo 2040) 75 PBD/ 1.537 37.38 112 0.724 1.140 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Chloro 1240) 100 PBD (control) 1.544 37.51 97 0.781 1.140

TABLE 3 REDUCED-DISTANCE GOLF BALLS WITH LOW COR CORE Core Compositions (20 pph ZDA - Comp. Trigonox 65) Size (in) Weight (g) (Atti) CoR S.G. 75 PBD/ 1.558 37.42 58 0.668 1.130 25 Butyl rubber (Butyl 301) 75 PBD/ 1.557 37.65 62 0.673 1.130 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Bromo 2030) 75 PBD/ 1.558 37.58 56 0.677 1.130 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Bromo 2040) 75 PBD/ 1.557 37.72 62 0:677 1.130 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Chloro 1240) 100 PBD (control) 1.560 37.87 50 0.774 1.130

TABLE 4 REDUCED-DISTANCE GOLF BALLS WITH LOW COR CORE Core Compositions (20 pph ZDA - Comp. Dicumyl Peroxide) Size (in) Weight (g) (Atti) CoR S.G. 75 PBD/ 1.546 37.34 68 0.669 1.130 25 Butyl rubber (Butyl 301) 75 PBD/ 1.545 37.13 75 0.678 1.130 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Bromo 2030) 75 PBD/ 1.548 37.25 68 0.673 1.130 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Bromo 2040) 75 PBD/ 1.547 37.39 75 0.680 1.130 25 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Chloro 1240) 100 PBD (control) 1.547 37.25 58 0.773 1.130

TABLE 5 REDUCED-DISTANCE GOLF BALLS WITH LOW COR CORE Core Compositions (20 pph ZDA - Comp. Dicumyl Peroxide) Size (in) Weight (g) (Atti) CoR S.G. 85 PBD/ 1.546 37.41 69 0.708 1.130 15 Butyl rubber (Butyl 301) 85 PBD/ 1.546 37.36 72 0.719 1.130 15 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Bromo 2030) 85 PBD/ 1.542 37.29 79 0.717 1.130 15 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Bromo 2040) 85 PBD/ 1.546 37.18 70 0.714 1.130 15 HALOGENATED BUTYL RUBBER (Chloro 1240) 100 PBD (control) 1.547 37.25 63 0.771 1.130

The cores shown in Tables 2-4 have similar rubber contents. The cores from Tables 2 and 3 have different amounts of co-reaction agent ZDA and the results show a lower amount of co-reaction agent tends to reduce CoR. The cores from Table 3 and 4 used the same amount but different type of co-reaction agent ZDA. The results show that the CoRs for the cores stay substantially the same. The cores from Table 5 have less of the low resilient butyl rubber than the cores from Table 4. The results show that cores with less of the low resilient rubber have higher CoR, as expected.

Table 6 shows the characteristics of low compression golf balls A-D according to another embodiment of the present invention. Golf balls A-D have generally lower compression than the Pinnacle® Practice ball, Pinnacle Gold® Distance ball and Pro V1® balls. Golf balls A-D also have CoR values below those of the Pinnacle® Practice ball, Pinnacle Gold® Distance ball and Pro V1® balls. These low compression, low CoR balls can be used in combination with the lower aerodynamic factors discussed above to produce balls in accordance with the present invention. TABLE 6 REDUCED DISTANCE LOW COMPRESSION GOLF BALLS HAVING LOW COR Cover (ionomer Size Weight Comp Shore Ball Core (in) blends)* (in) (oz) (Atti) CoR C/D A 1.550-65 8528/9650 1.688 1.612 79.1 0.763 90.3/59.8 B 1.550-65 8528/9910 1.691 1.614 79.9 0.767 91.2/60.6 C 1.550-70 8528/9650 1.681 1.607 83.9 0.770 89.6/58.8 D 1.550-70 8528/9910 1.688 1.613 85.5 0.772   91/60.6 Pinnacle ® Practice Production Production 1.684 1.601 100.2 0.799 83.8/54.8 Pinnacle Gold ® Production Production 1.689 1.607 86.6 0.810 94.8/66.4 Distance Pro V1 ® Production Production 1.686 1.608 83.6 0.814   79/55.7 *Numbers indicate the Surlyn ® ionomer blend used.

Table 7 shows the characteristics of low CoR golf balls according to the present invention having a core with 25%, 50% and 75% styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), another low resilient rubber similar to butyl rubber discussed above. The remaining rubber component is high-cis polybutadiene, similar to above. The rubber components are cross-linked with 20-32 parts of ZDA co-reaction agent. The SBR golf balls have CoR values below that of the control ball, i.e., a two-piece distance golf ball. Ball Size (mm) - Size (mm) - Weight Comp Core Pole Equator (gm) (Atti) CoR 25 SBR 44 44 36.14 73 0.776 75 PBD 50 SBR 45 44 36.34 72 0.744 50 PBD 75 SBR 42 45 36.38 79 0.709 25 PBD Control 44 46 36.05 73 0.805

Again the reduced CoR cores shown in Table 7 can be combined with the D/W and L/W variables discussed above to produce balls in accordance with the present invention.

In Tables 8A-8C below are core compositions and core/ball physical properties for low weight and/or low CoR cores and golf balls (2)-(8). Golf Balls (1)-(8) are of a three-piece ball construction having a core dimension of about 1.53 inches, a core and casing dimension of about 1.62 inches, and a finished ball dimension (core, casing, cover) of about 1.68 inches. Each of golf balls (1)-(8) includes a casing or inner cover composed of an ionomer blend, for example Surlyn. The cover for each ball is a cast aromatic urethane with a 392 Icosahedron dimple pattern (see below). The casing and cover for balls (1)-(8) are similar to that of a premium multi-layer golf ball.

In this embodiment, cores having three different weights and various compositions (see Table 8A) are compared to each other. With reference to Table 8A, the “normal” weight cores include a high specific gravity filler to provide the ball with the maximum 1.62 oz USGA weight. A barium sulfate filler with a 4.2 s.g. and 325 mesh size (available as Polywate 325) is added to the normal cores. The ˜1.510 oz weight cores do not contain high specific gravity fillers. The ˜1.40 oz. weight balls have hollow microspheres incorporated therein to further reduce the weight of the cores. In selected cores, a low-resilient butyl rubber makes up a portion of the rubber component. TABLE 8A COMPOSITIONS OF CORES (2)-(8) FOR REDUCED DISTANCE GOLF BALLS Ball Core Control (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Norm. Norm. Norm. Min. Min. Lgt Lgt Lgt Wgt Wgt Wgt Wgt Wgt Wgt Wgt Wgt Norm. 0.700 0.650 0.700 0.650 0.700 0.650 Norm. CoR CoR CoR CoR CoR CoR CoR CoR Constituent phr phr phr phr phr phr phr phr Halogenated butyl rubber 0 26 40 30 44 26 40 0 PBD (CB 23) 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 PBD (Shell 1220) 0 74 60 70 56 74 60 0 ZDA Powder 26 23 22 24 25 16.5 17 24 Zinc Oxide 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 ZnPCTP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 microsphere 0 0 0 0 0 15.5 18 25.5 Dicumyl Peroxide 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.8 (Perkadox BC) Barium sulfate 16.8 18.1 18.4 0 0 0 0 0 (Polywate 325)

TABLE 8B PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF CORES (2)-(8) FOR REDUCED DISTANCE GOLF BALLS Ball Core Size (in) Weight (oz) Compression CoR Control (1) 1.528 1.270 67 0.790 (2) 1.529 1.268 72 0.683 (3) 1.525 1.264 78 0.622 (4) 1.531 1.161 68 0.672 (5) 1.529 1.159 68 0.595 (6) 1.527 1.046 64 0.661 (7) 1.526 1.039 69 0.596 (8) 1.527 1.027 77 0.799

TABLE 8C PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF REDUCED DISTANCE GOLF BALLS (2)-(8) Finished Ball Size (in) Weight (oz) Compression CoR Shore C Control (1) 1.683 1.618 90 0.796 82 (2) 1.683 1.619 93 0.704 81 (3) 1.684 1.620 99 0.649 81 (4) 1.684 1.511 90 0.696 81 (5) 1.683 1.513 89 0.635 81 (6) 1.683 1.405 86 0.689 81 (7) 1.683 1.399 92 0.631 82 (8) 1.683 1.386 97 0.801 81 Pro V1 ® 1.683 1.609 96 0.807 81

Table 8D shows the reduction in flight of low weight and/or low CoR golf balls (2)-(8) according to various embodiments of the present invention as compared with the flight of a Pro V1® golf ball under identical launch conditions. FIGS. 3-5 show the respective flight trajectory of golf balls (2)-(8) that demonstrate the range of flight trajectories possible through the modification of these construction parameters. FIG. 4 illustrates a trajectory whose perceived flight path (when viewed from the golfer's viewpoint) matches that of a premium multilayer golf ball, but at a reduced distance. TABLE 8D FLIGHT OF REDUCED DISTANCE GOLF BALLS (2)-(8) HAVING LOW WEIGHT AND/OR LOW COR Flight Δ from Ball Weight/CoR Carry Total Control (1) Pro V1 ® Reference 288.2 305.0 −0.1 Control (1) Normal/Normal 286.5 305.1 0.0 (2) Normal/0.700 274.6 292.8 −12.3 (3) Normal/0.650 268.4 286.9 −18.2 (4) 1.510 oz./0.700 270.1 285.1 −20.0 (5) 1.510 oz./0.650 262.2 277.2 −27.9 (6) 1.40 oz./0.700 263.5 276.6 −28.5 (7) 1.40 oz/0.650 258.3 271.3 −33.8 (8) 1.40 oz/Normal 279.7 291.4 −13.7

The data shows that when the weight of the ball is reduced and other factors remain substantially the same, as in the control ball 1 and ball 8, the total distance is reduced by 13.7 yards, while the cores° CoRs and the balls° CoRs are substantially similar. The weight difference between ball 1 and 8 is about 0.232 ounce. A comparison between ball 1, 2, and 3 again shows that the addition of butyl rubber reduces the CoR and the total distance, and higher butyl rubber content further reduces the total distance traveled after impact as shown in FIG. 3.

Comparisons of trios of balls 2, 4 and 6 and of balls 3, 5 and 7 show that when the content of low resilient butyl rubber is kept substantially the same and the weight of the ball is reduced, the total distance traveled after impact decrease accordingly.

The results shown in Tables 8A-8D show that controlled weight reduction causes controlled reduction in total distance traveled after impact. The inclusion of low resilient rubber, such as butyl rubbers mixed with the high resilient rubber such as high-cis 1,4polybutadiene further reduces the total distance.

In another embodiment, a golf ball according to the present invention includes a low-resilient cover that is made to be slower than a conventional ball but as durable. Accordingly, the cover may be made from a mid-hardness (or mid-acid) ionomer blend, such as 70% Surlyn® 8528 and 30% of either Surlyn® 9650 or Surlyn® 9910 from E.I. duPont de Nemours and Company. In a further embodiment, the cover of the ball may be made of non-ionomers including: polyurethane, polyurea, polyethylene, polypropylene, EPR, EPDM, butyl, and polybutadiene. In a further embodiment, the ball has an inner cover and an outer cover. The inner cover is made from an ionomer blend and has a Shore D hardness of at least about 60, and the outer cover is made from polyurethane or polyurea having a Shore D hardness of less than about 60.

Dimple Patterns and Profiles

As discussed briefly above, one way of adjusting the drag on, and correspondingly affecting the lift of, a golf ball is through different dimple patterns and profiles. Dimples on a golf ball create a turbulent boundary layer around the ball, i. e., the air in a thin layer adjacent to the ball flows in a turbulent manner. The turbulence energizes the boundary layer and helps it remain attached further around the ball to reduce the area of the wake. This greatly increases the average pressure behind the ball to reduce the pressure differential forward and aft of the ball, thereby substantially reducing the drag. Accordingly, a golf ball's dimple patterns, shapes, quantity and/or dimensions may be manipulated to achieve variances in the drag experienced by the ball during flight. In various embodiments of the present invention, a golf ball's dimple pattern, shape, quantity and/or dimension may be selected to “increase” drag on the ball without adversely affecting the ball's trajectory to achieve a reduction in overall flight distance.

As used herein, the term “dimple”, may include any texturizing on the surface of a golf ball, e.g., depressions and projections. Some non-limiting examples of depressions and projections include, but are not limited to, spherical depressions, meshes, raised ridges, and brambles. The depressions and projections may take a variety of planform shapes, such as circular, polygonal, oval, or irregular. Dimples that have multi-level configurations, i.e., dimple within a dimple, are also contemplated by the invention to obtain desirable aerodynamic characteristics.

Generally, it may be difficult to define and measure a dimple's edge angle due to the indistinct nature of the boundary dividing the ball's undimpled land surface from the dimple depression itself FIG. 6 shows a dimple half-profile 30, extending from the dimple centerline 31 to the land surface outside of the dimple 33. Due to the effects of the paint and/or the dimple design itself, the junction between the land surface and the dimple sidewall is not a sharp corner and is therefore indistinct. This makes the measurement of dimple edge angle and dimple diameter somewhat ambiguous. To resolve this problem, the ball phantom surface 32 is constructed above the dimple as a continuation of the land surface 33. A first tangent line T1 is then constructed at a point on the dimple sidewall that is spaced 0.003 inches radially inward from the phantom surface 32. T1 intersects phantom surface 32 at a point P1, which defines a nominal dimple edge position. A second tangent line T2 is then constructed, tangent to the phantom surface 32, at P1. The edge angle is the angle between T1 and T2. The dimple diameter is the distance between P1 and its equivalent point diametrically opposite along the dimple perimeter. Alternatively, it is twice the distance between P1 and the dimple centerline 31, measured in a direction perpendicular to centerline 31.

In one embodiment, a textured clear coating may be applied to the outer surface of the golf ball to increase the skin friction of the ball, e.g., friction caused by surface roughness. Higher skin friction increases drag on the ball to reduce flight distance.

In a preferred embodiment, a golf ball having a low CoR and a low coverage dimple pattern with dimples having a high edge angle is found to reduce the distance the ball travels by at least 5 yards versus a similar conventional golf ball. A low coverage dimple pattern according to this embodiment is dimple coverage of about 55% to 80%, preferably dimple coverage of about 60% to 70%, and more preferably dimple coverage of about 65%. A high edge angle according to this embodiment is a dimple edge angle of from about 16 to 24 degrees, preferably from about 18 to 22 degrees, and more preferably about 20 degrees. More particularly, a low coverage dimple pattern according to this embodiment of the present invention includes a 440 dimple cuboctahedron pattern, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,948,143 to Aoyama, which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety, wherein the dimple coverage is about 70% and the dimple edge angle is between about 18° to about 22°.

Dimple patterns that provide a high percentage of surface coverage are well-known in the art. For example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,562,552, 5,575,477, 5,957,787, 5,249,804, and 4,925,193 the entire disclosures of which are incorporated by reference herein, disclose geometric patterns for positioning dimples on a golf ball. A low coverage, high edge angle dimple pattern that performs according to the present invention may be achieved using any one of the dimple patterns disclosed in the aforementioned patents by reducing dimple coverage to about 60% to about 70% and increasing the dimple edge angle to about 16°, 18°, 20°and/or 22°. In one example, the desired reduction in dimple coverage is achieved by reducing the dimple diameters by the same or different amounts. Without being tied to a particular theory, this unexpected result may be attributed to an excessive amount of turbulence being generated by the greater edge angle of each dimple, with a corresponding increase in the drag on the ball.

As shown in FIGS. 7 and 7A and in accordance to an embodiment of the present invention, a golf ball 10 comprises a plurality of dimples 15 arranged in an icosahedron pattern. This dimple pattern has a reduced dimple coverage. The edge angle of these dimples is preferably in the range of 18° to 22°. Generally, an icosahedron pattern comprises twenty triangles with five triangles 12 sharing a common vertex coinciding with each pole, and ten triangles 13 disposed in the equatorial region between the two five-triangle polar regions. Usually, as in this case, the ten equatorial triangles 13 are modified somewhat to provide an equator 14 that does not intersect any dimples. The equator can then be used as the mold parting line. FIG. 7A is a side view of the ball showing these modified equatorial triangles 13. In unmodified form, a row of dimples would have existed directly on the equator 14. This row was removed, and other dimples were shifted and resized to fill the resulting space. This also created a “jog” in one side of the triangle. Other suitable dimple patterns include dodecahedron, octahedron, hexahedron and tetrahedron, among others. The dimple pattern may also be defined at least partially by phyllotaxis-based patterns, such as those described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,338,684.

This embodiment comprises seven different sized dimples, as shown in Table A below: TABLE A Dimples and Dimple Pattern Number of Surface Dimple Diameter (inch) Dimples Coverage % A .105 12 1.2 B .141 20 3.5 C .146 40 7.6 D .150 50 10.0 E .155 60 12.8 F .160 80 18.2 G .164 70 16.7 Total 332 70.0%

These dimples form ten polar triangles 12, with the smallest dimples A occupying the vertices and the largest dimples G occupying most of the interior of the triangle. Three dimples F and two dimples C symmetrically form two sides of the triangle, and a symmetrical arrangement of one dimple F, two dimples D and two dimples C form the remaining side of the triangle, as shown in FIG. 7. In addition, the dimples form ten equatorial triangles 13 which share their vertex dimples A and one of their sides with the ten polar triangles 12. Two dimples E and two dimples B symmetrically form the remaining sides, as shown in FIG. 7A.

Another embodiment of the present invention shown in FIG. 8 comprises fewer and larger dimples. This embodiment comprises six different sized dimples, as shown in Table B below: TABLE B Dimples and Dimple Pattern Number of Surface Dimple Diameter (inch) Dimples Coverage % A .118 12 1.5 B .163 60 14.2 C .177 10 2.8 D .182 90 26.5 E .186 50 15.4 F .191 30 9.7 Total 252 70.0%

As shown in FIG. 8, golf ball 20 comprises a plurality of dimples 25 arranged into an icosaedron pattern. Ball 20 comprises ten polar triangles 22 with smallest dimples A occupying the vertices of the triangle. Each side of polar triangle 22 is a symmetrical arrangement of two dimples D and two dimples B. The interior of triangle 22 comprises three dimples D and three dimples E. As shown in FIG. 8A, the dimple arrangement further comprises ten equatorial triangles 23. However, in this embodiment only minor adjustments in dimples size and position were required in order to provide a dimple-free equator 24, and no dimples were removed. Thus, the equatorial triangles 23 are quite similar to the polar triangles 22, and they do not have a “jog” in one of their sides.

In another embodiment, a golf ball can have 392 dimples arranged in an icosahedron pattern, as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,969,327, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

In a farther embodiment, a golf ball having a low CoR includes a high coverage dimple pattern, i.e., greater than 80%, with the same dimple arrangement as shown in FIG. 7 but with larger dimples that results in an increase in drag on the ball as long as the edge angle of the dimples remains high, i.e., between 16°-21°. In accordance with another embodiment of the present invention, Table 9 shows the characteristics of multi-layer golf balls having a higher drag and a lower coefficient of restitution (CoR) than a comparative Pro Vlx® golf ball. TABLE 9 CHARACTERISTICS OF REDUCED DISTANCE MULTI-LAYER GOLF BALLS Golf Ball Example 1 Reduced Dimple Example 2 Comparative Coverage, Reduced Example Increased Edge Angle Edge Angle (Pro V1x ®) Characteristics of Inner 1.000″ Core % Butyl Rubber* 19 19 0 Compression ˜15 ˜15 ˜15 CoR 0.695 0.695 0.750 Characteristics of Outer Core to 1.550″ % Butyl Rubber* 5 5 0 Compression 85 85 85 CoR 0.745 0.745 0.795 Characteristics of Inner Cover to 1.620″ (Same Material: 50% Na, 50% Li Ionomer) Compression 95 95 95 CoR 0.765 0.765 0.815 Characteristics of Outer Cover to 1.680″ (Same Material: Cast Urethane) Compression 100 100 100 CoR 0.765 0.765 0.810 Dimple Count 332 332 332 Coverage 76% 84% 84% Edge Angle 15°/14° 13°/11° 14°/13° Ball Speed 172.9 172.5 175.6 (miles per hour) Launch Angle** 9.5° 9.5° 9.6° Spin** 2790 2760 2780 Total Distance 301 300 308 Covered (yds)** *In the table note that %(butyl rubber) and parts are interchangeable since % refers to the parts of butyl rubber used relative to 100% or 100 parts of total rubber used (in this case total rubber is butyl plus polybutadiene). **When hit at a club head speed of 175 ft/s, a 9.5° launch angle, and an average spin rate of 2800 rpm.

As shown in Table 9, Examples 1 and 2 have the same construction and the same material layers, but have different aerodynamic reduction factors. In particular, both inventive examples have a low resilient butyl rubber content of 19% in the inner core, resulting in an inner core with a lower CoR than the comparative example (0.695 versus 0.750). With respect to golf ball aerodynamics, the golf ball of Example 1 increases the drag coefficient by means of a low coverage, high edge angle dimple pattern resulting in an increased drag coefficient, whereas the golf ball of Example 2 increases the drag coefficient by means of a reduced edge angle. The high drag coefficient and low CoR of Examples 1 and 2 result in reduced-distance golf balls with a play-friendly trajectory.

FIG. 9 illustrates the trajectory plots of the inventive Examples1 and 2 as well as the comparative Pro V1x® golf ball. As shown in FIG. 9, while the total distance after impact is reduced, the flight trajectory of each inventive ball remains similar to the comparative ball. Particularly, the trajectory for all balls is substantially the same in the first seventy yards. As illustrated, the variation in elevation of the ball at 70 yards is less than 3 yards, preferably less than 2 yards and most preferably less than the 1 yard. The variation in elevation at 120 yards is preferably less than 5 yards, more preferably less than 3 yards and most preferably less than 1 yard. Advantageously, by maintaining similar trajectory as an optimal high performance ball, the golf balls of the present invention provide to professional and amateur golfers the same perceived trajectory from the golfer's viewpoint as a maximum distance high performance ball.

In accordance with another embodiment of the present invention, Table 10 shows the characteristics of multi-layer golf balls having high spin, a higher drag and a lower coefficient of restitution (CoR) than a comparative Pro V1x® golf ball. TABLE 10 CHARACTERISTICS OF REDUCED DISTANCE MULTI-LAYER GOLF BALLS WITH HIGH SPIN Golf Ball Ex. 3 Reduced Dimple Coverage, Ex. 4 Increased Edge Reduced Comp. Ex. Angle Edge Angle (Pro V1x ®) Characteristics of Inner 1.000″ Core % Butyl Rubber* 19 19 0 Compression 45 45 ˜15 CoR    0.695 0.695 0.750 Characteristics of Outer Core to 1.550″ % Butyl Rubber*  8 8 0 Shore D Hardness 85 85 88 Compression 85 85 85 CoR    0.745 0.745 0.795 Characteristics of Inner Cover to 1.620″ (Same Material: 50% Na, 50% Li Ionomer) Compression 92 92 95 CoR    0.760 0.760 0.815 Characteristics of Outer Cover to 1.680″ (Same Material: Cast Urethane) Compression 100  100 100 CoR    0.765 0.765 0.810 Dimple Count 332  332 332 Coverage 76% 84% 84% Edge Angle 15°/14° 14°/13° 14°/13° Launch Angle** 9.4° 9.5° 9.6° Spin**  2760*** 2770 2780 Total Distance  297*** 302 308 Covered (yds)** *In the table note that %(butyl rubber) and parts are interchangeable since % refers to the parts of butyl rubber used relative to 100% or 100 parts of total rubber used (in this case total rubber is butyl plus polybutadiene). **When hit at a club head speed of 175 ft/s, a 9.5° launch angle, and an average spin rate of 2800 rpm. ***Estimated based on hob data.

As shown in Table 10, Examples 3 and 4 have the same construction and the same material layers, but have different aerodynamic reduction factors. In particular, both inventive examples have a low resilient butyl rubber content of 19% in the inner core, resulting in an inner cover with a lower CoR than the comparative example (0.695 versus 0.750). Moreover, both inventive examples have a higher compression of the inner core than the comparative example (45 versus˜15) resulting in higher spin. With respect to golf ball aerodynamics, the golf ball of Example 3 increases the drag coefficient by means of a low coverage, high edge angle dimple pattern resulting in an increased drag coefficient, whereas the golf ball of Example 4 increases the drag coefficient by means of a reduced edge angle. The high spin, high drag coefficient and low CoR of Examples 1 and 2 result in reduced-distance golf balls with a play-friendly trajectory and increased greenside spin

As shown in Examples 1-4 in Tables 9-10, butyl rubber is added in both the inner core and in the outer core, with higher amount of butyl rubber in the inner core. Butyl rubber is used in these examples as a fine tuning mechanism, i.e., higher amount is used in the inner core to reduce by small increments the distance that the ball traveled, since its effect on the ball's COR is less due to the fact that the inner core is further away from the ball's deformation zone at impact with the club. Conversely, to reduce the distance the balls traveled by larger increments, i.e., coarse tuning, more butyl rubber can be included in the outer core.

In a further embodiment, the golf ball prepared according to the present invention has an inner core layer and an outer core layer, wherein the inner core layer includes a higher amount of butyl rubber, e.g., 15-50 parts butyl rubber, than the outer core. When players with high swing speed strike the ball the compression zone would extend to the high butyl rubber inner core to reduce the distance that the ball would travel . . . .

Butyl rubber or other low resilience rubbers or polymers, described above, can be used.

Hence, according to the present invention, by controlling the CoR through the introduction of low resilient rubber, lowering the weight of the ball, thickening the cover made from low resilient ionomers, increasing the size of the ball, reducing the dimple coverage and increasing or decreasing the dimple edge angle, C_(D/W and C) _(L/W) coefficients, and/or combinations and sub-combinations thereof, a high performance ball that has reduced total distance after impact can be produced.

As shown in FIG. 3, while the total distance after impact is reduced the trajectory of the ball's flight remains similar to the control ball 1 or premium multilayer ball, which is the current best selling golf ball. Particularly, the trajectory for all balls is substantially the same in the first seventy yards. As illustrated, the variation in elevation of the ball at 70 yards is less than 3 yards, preferably less than 2 yards and most preferably less than the 1 yard. The variation in elevation at 120 yards is preferably less than 5 yards, more preferably less than 3 yards and most preferably less than 1 yard. Advantageously, by maintaining similar trajectory as an optimal high performance ball, the golf balls of the present invention provide to professional and amateur golfers the same perceived trajectory from the golfer's viewpoint as a maximum distance high performance ball.

While various descriptions of the present invention are described above, it is understood that the various features of the embodiments of the present invention shown herein can be used singly or in combination thereof. For example, the dimple depth may be the same for all the dimples. Alternatively, the dimple depth may vary throughout the golf ball. The dimple depth may also be shallow to raise the trajectory of the ball's flight, or deep to lower the ball's trajectory. This invention is also not to be limited to the specifically preferred embodiments depicted therein.

Additionally, any dimple pattern for a golf ball disclosed in the patent literature or commercial products can be suitably adapted to be incorporated into the present invention, i.e., by reducing the dimple coverage to 55-75% and by increasing edge angle of the dimples to 16-24 degrees. Such dimple pattern patents include, but are not limited to the ones assigned to the owner of the present invention: U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,948,143, 5,415,410, 5,957,786, 6,527,653, 6,682,442, 6,699,143, and 6,705,959.

Dimple pattern patents assigned to others may also be suitably adapted for use with the present invention. Non-limiting examples of these suitable patents include: U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,560,168, 5,588,924, 6,346,054, 6,527,654, 6,530,850, 6,595,876, 6,620,060, 6,709,348, 6,761,647, 6,814,677, and 6,843,736.

Other than in the operating examples, or unless otherwise expressly specified, all of the numerical ranges, amounts, values and percentages such as those for amounts of materials and others in the specification may be read as if prefaced by the word “about” even though the term “about” may not expressly appear with the value, amount or range. Accordingly, unless indicated to the contrary, the numerical parameters set forth in the specification and attached claims are approximations that may vary depending upon the desired properties sought to be obtained by the present invention. At the very least, and not as an attempt to limit the application of the doctrine of equivalents to the scope of the claims, each numerical parameter should at least be construed in light of the number of reported significant digits and by applying ordinary rounding techniques.

Notwithstanding that the numerical ranges and parameters setting forth the broad scope of the invention are approximations, the numerical values set forth in the specific examples are reported as precisely as possible. Any numerical value, however, inherently contain certain errors necessarily resulting from the standard deviation found in their respective testing measurements. Furthermore, when numerical ranges of varying scope are set forth herein, it is contemplated that any combination of these values inclusive of the recited values may be used. 

1. A golf ball comprising an inner core layer, an outer core layer, an inner cover layer and an outer cover layer wherein at least one of the inner core or outer core layer comprise from about 10 to 80 parts of butyl rubber, and wherein said golf ball has a coefficient of restitution of less than 0.780 and a compression of at least about
 80. 2. The golf ball of claim 1, wherein the inner core comprises from about 15 to 60 parts of butyl or halobutyl rubber and the outer core layer comprises about 0 to 40 parts of butyl or halobutyl rubber.
 3. The golf ball of claim 1, wherein the inner core has a compression of less than 50 and the overall core has a compression of at least
 60. 4. The golf ball of claim 3, wherein the inner core has a compression of less than about
 40. 5. The golf ball of claim 1, wherein the inner cover layer comprises an ionomer and has a Shore D hardness of at least about
 60. 6. The golf ball of claim 1, wherein the outer cover layer comprises a polyurethane or polyurea having a Shore D hardness of less than about
 60. 7. The golf ball of claim 2, wherein the inner core has a coefficient of restitution of less than 0.730 and a compression of less than 30, and wherein the ball has a compression of at least 90 and a coefficient of restitution of less than 0.775.
 8. The golf ball of claim 7, wherein the inner cover layer comprises an ionomer and has a Shore D hardness of at least about 60, and wherein the outer cover layer comprises a polyurethane or polyurea having a Shore D hardness of less than about
 60. 9. The golf ball of claim 1, wherein the outer cover layer comprises a plurality of dimples, and wherein the plurality of dimples covers less than about 78% of the surface area of the outer cover layer.
 10. The golf ball of claim 9, wherein the edge angles of the dimples range from about 10 to 18 degrees.
 11. The golf ball of claim 5, wherein the ionomer has a Shore D hardness of at least about
 64. 12. The golf ball of claim 6, wherein the polyurethane or polyurea has a hardness of less than
 55. 13. The golf ball of claim 1, wherein the golf ball weight is from about 1.50 to 1.62 ounces.
 14. The golf ball of claim 13, wherein the golf ball weight is from about 1.60 to 1.62 ounces.
 15. The golf ball of claim 1, wherein the golf ball has a lift to weight ratio greater than 1.5 at a Reynolds number of about 205,000 and a spin rate of about 2900 rpm.
 16. A golf ball comprising an inner core, an outer core layer, an inner cover layer and an outer cover layer wherein the inner core has a coefficient of restitution of less than 0.730 and a compression of less than about 30 and the golfball has a coefficient of restitution of less than 0.775 and a compression of at least about
 90. 17. The golf ball of claim 16, wherein the inner core comprises from about 10 to 60 parts of butyl or halobutyl rubber and about 90 to 40 parts of polybutadiene rubber.
 18. The golf ball of claim 17, wherein the inner cover layer comprises an ionomer having a Shore D hardness of at least about 60 and the outer cover layer comprises a polyurethane or polyunrea having a Shore D hardness of less than about
 55. 19. The golf ball of claim 16, wherein the golf ball has a lift to weight ratio greater than 1.5 at a Reynolds number of about 205,000 and a spin rate of about 2900 rpm.
 20. A golf ball comprising a core comprising from about 10 to 60 parts of butyl or halobutyl rubber and having a coefficient of restitution of less than 0.750 and a compression of less than about 60, an inner cover layer comprising an ionomer and having a Shore D hardness of at least about 60, an outer cover layer comprising a polyurethane or polyurea having a Shore D hardness of less than about 55, said golf ball having a coefficient of restitution of less than 0.775 and a compression of at least about
 90. 21. The golf ball of claim 20, wherein the golf ball has a lift to weight ratio greater than 1.5 at a Reynolds number of about 205,000 and a spin rate of about 2900 rpm.
 22. A golf ball comprising: an inner core layer, an outer core layer, and at least one cover layer, and a means for reducing the distance traveled by the golf ball after impact. 